Many of us trust our instinct or our “gut” when it comes to making hiring decisions. Often we make hiring decisions based upon a resume or employment application and a brief interview. We tend to hire people who we like or people who give us a good feeling about their capabilities. Sometimes we make great choices and sometimes we make bad choices.
Competency modeling can help align people with the skills necessary to perform specific job duties or functions in your organization. A competency model, typically defined as a group of characteristics that drive high levels of performance in particular job or occupation, can help organizations make hiring choices based on an individual’s knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSA’s) instead of based on a feeling of compatibility.
Building competency models for jobs or occupations is the first step in improving hiring practices. If your organization struggles with the costs and time associated with the hiring process, or worse yet terminations, building a competency model may help.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Monday, December 07, 2009
Harmful Conflict Increasing?
A recent LinkedIn Poll suggests that harmful workplace conflict is on the rise!
Results from a recently posted poll may suggest that harmful workplace conflict is currently increasing in organizations. The polls appears as follows:
Harmful Workplace Conflict in my Organization is:
... increasing
... decreasing
... staying about the same
... not a problem/doesn’t exist
This poll originally posted on November 27, 2009 has had the following results:
42% increasing
35% staying about the same
14% decreasing
7% not a problem/doesn’t exist
Are you on LinkedIn? Take the poll/see updated results here.
Need help with harmful workplace conflict? Coaching and training sessions are available in both on-line and traditional face-to-face formats. Visit the website or contact me directly.
www.appreciativestrategies.com
dennis@appreciativestrategies.com
Results from a recently posted poll may suggest that harmful workplace conflict is currently increasing in organizations. The polls appears as follows:
Harmful Workplace Conflict in my Organization is:
... increasing
... decreasing
... staying about the same
... not a problem/doesn’t exist
This poll originally posted on November 27, 2009 has had the following results:
42% increasing
35% staying about the same
14% decreasing
7% not a problem/doesn’t exist
Are you on LinkedIn? Take the poll/see updated results here.
Need help with harmful workplace conflict? Coaching and training sessions are available in both on-line and traditional face-to-face formats. Visit the website or contact me directly.
www.appreciativestrategies.com
dennis@appreciativestrategies.com
Friday, October 30, 2009
Leadership Perception and Self-Deception
Perception
Few people would argue that confidence is a necessary leadership competency. When does confidence go too far and start to limit, or even worse damage good leadership and decision making skills? Leaders are sometimes labeled as having narcissistic personality traits; traits that could be doing more damage to organization growth and stability than they realize. Most leaders believe that they are in their role to make good decisions and often make them quickly, seemingly knowing the precise next move to take the organization forward or to solve a critical workplace challenge. How much of this decision making ability is based on experience? How much of that experience is based on the perception of the situation?
Self-Deception
What about self-deception? Self-deception by definition would indicate that leaders sometimes deceive themselves as they face workplace challenges. Often in the workplace employees complain about the repetitive nature of problems. The same or similar problems continue to happen over and over again. While there may be many reasons that this occurs one sometimes unforeseen reason is that the leadership continues to implement changes that are not addressing the root cause. Instead they are addressing issues that the leadership views as problems, based on their perception. Convinced that they are implementing practical, intelligent, and appropriate resolutions the leaders are suffering from self-deception. Being so fixated on a problem they fail to see other problems that are happening right before their eyes. So confident of the answers to the problems they face, they fail to realize that it is their own solution to the problems that are causing them.
Training Solutions
A recently published training program will address leadership skills and competencies in the areas of perception and self-deception. Details of this program can be found in the book The 2010 Pfeiffer Annual: Training and is available at amazon.com or pfeiffer.com.
This program can also be delivered on site at your location with expert facilitation provided by the program author.
Contact: Dennis E. Gilbert – a human performance improvement consultant and President of Appreciative Strategies, LLC may be reached at (570) 433-8286 or by email: dennis@appreciativestrategies.com.
Few people would argue that confidence is a necessary leadership competency. When does confidence go too far and start to limit, or even worse damage good leadership and decision making skills? Leaders are sometimes labeled as having narcissistic personality traits; traits that could be doing more damage to organization growth and stability than they realize. Most leaders believe that they are in their role to make good decisions and often make them quickly, seemingly knowing the precise next move to take the organization forward or to solve a critical workplace challenge. How much of this decision making ability is based on experience? How much of that experience is based on the perception of the situation?
Self-Deception
What about self-deception? Self-deception by definition would indicate that leaders sometimes deceive themselves as they face workplace challenges. Often in the workplace employees complain about the repetitive nature of problems. The same or similar problems continue to happen over and over again. While there may be many reasons that this occurs one sometimes unforeseen reason is that the leadership continues to implement changes that are not addressing the root cause. Instead they are addressing issues that the leadership views as problems, based on their perception. Convinced that they are implementing practical, intelligent, and appropriate resolutions the leaders are suffering from self-deception. Being so fixated on a problem they fail to see other problems that are happening right before their eyes. So confident of the answers to the problems they face, they fail to realize that it is their own solution to the problems that are causing them.
Training Solutions
A recently published training program will address leadership skills and competencies in the areas of perception and self-deception. Details of this program can be found in the book The 2010 Pfeiffer Annual: Training and is available at amazon.com or pfeiffer.com.
This program can also be delivered on site at your location with expert facilitation provided by the program author.
Contact: Dennis E. Gilbert – a human performance improvement consultant and President of Appreciative Strategies, LLC may be reached at (570) 433-8286 or by email: dennis@appreciativestrategies.com.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Effort or Results?
Leadership certainly has its challenges. How we lead and perhaps more importantly how we measure results is critically important to organizations that wish to stay competitive and be successful.
Often managers discuss with me the effort that they or their employee teams put in on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis. I listen with empathy as employees discuss long hours, missed family, and lack of work/life balance. While many of these stories are strikingly real, like any good story some begin to shift from fact to fantasy. Effort is very important but strong leaders should avoid comparing effort with results. Working long hours doesn’t necessarily indicate that you are getting the best results, and getting results doesn’t guarantee you have given your best effort.
Leadership Action: Create a culture that is stimulated by results, measuring effort alone will not necessarily generate success.
Often managers discuss with me the effort that they or their employee teams put in on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis. I listen with empathy as employees discuss long hours, missed family, and lack of work/life balance. While many of these stories are strikingly real, like any good story some begin to shift from fact to fantasy. Effort is very important but strong leaders should avoid comparing effort with results. Working long hours doesn’t necessarily indicate that you are getting the best results, and getting results doesn’t guarantee you have given your best effort.
Leadership Action: Create a culture that is stimulated by results, measuring effort alone will not necessarily generate success.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Right Sizing - Managing Human Capital
Are you making the correct choices as it relates to human capital? Many organizations are being faced with challenging human resource decisions, in part because of weak economic conditions here in the United States. Unfortunately many business owners and managers find themselves aggressively engaged in “right-sizing,” a term made popular during the late 1980’s and early 1990’s. Often this term has been used to describe human capital needs aligned with revenue or profitability.
While there are many different ways to pursue economic lay-offs, these decisions and choices are never easy. Organizations need to focus on the strategic objectives and be very honest about the organizations direction. As difficult as it may be, if you are faced with these tough choices you need to focus on what is the best choice for both short and long-term survival. Often when discussing these situations many business owners and managers will quickly divert into external factors, such as the employee’s personal situation, family size, and medical conditions. As sensitive human beings we feel the pain and sorrow associated with such difficult decisions, but the reality is that we need to make choices which allow for the survival of the organization.
Below are a few points to consider, keeping in mind that every situation is unique and the appropriate call to action could vary drastically from organization to organization.
1. Headcount to revenue ratios: Are we right-sized? How much revenue does each person need to produce? (Gross Revenue / Headcount = Ratio) or (Gross Profit/Headcount = Ratio)
2. Gross Profit / Products and Services: What areas yield the most GP? Who can add value to this revenue stream? How can we capitalize on what is working well, instead of focusing on what is not working.
3. Technical/Trade Skills: What employees bring the most skills and how do they relate to items 1 and 2?
4. Outsourced Opportunities: What can be outsourced to reduce costs? While not always a good solution, it often is very effective short-term.
5. Fight of your life: If you are in the fight of your life, who do you want standing beside you? This should be based on 1 through 4 and not based on emotional choices because of compassion. Who can really make the most impact while keeping the organization progressing.
Sound too tough or too “cut-throat?” During leadership workshops and coaching sessions I have often facilitated discussions on this topic and consulted with organizations to help them think more strategically about their human capital. Nearly all employee terminations are difficult, but economic lay-offs I always find the most challenging.
Remember your responsibility to the organization for survival and profitability. Part of that responsibility is the organizations reputation, so don’t disregard the stigma of becoming a “cut-throat” entity. If you become identified as “cut-throat,” when the economic conditions improve you will have new challenges to face with rebuilding a workforce in your local community.
While there are many different ways to pursue economic lay-offs, these decisions and choices are never easy. Organizations need to focus on the strategic objectives and be very honest about the organizations direction. As difficult as it may be, if you are faced with these tough choices you need to focus on what is the best choice for both short and long-term survival. Often when discussing these situations many business owners and managers will quickly divert into external factors, such as the employee’s personal situation, family size, and medical conditions. As sensitive human beings we feel the pain and sorrow associated with such difficult decisions, but the reality is that we need to make choices which allow for the survival of the organization.
Below are a few points to consider, keeping in mind that every situation is unique and the appropriate call to action could vary drastically from organization to organization.
1. Headcount to revenue ratios: Are we right-sized? How much revenue does each person need to produce? (Gross Revenue / Headcount = Ratio) or (Gross Profit/Headcount = Ratio)
2. Gross Profit / Products and Services: What areas yield the most GP? Who can add value to this revenue stream? How can we capitalize on what is working well, instead of focusing on what is not working.
3. Technical/Trade Skills: What employees bring the most skills and how do they relate to items 1 and 2?
4. Outsourced Opportunities: What can be outsourced to reduce costs? While not always a good solution, it often is very effective short-term.
5. Fight of your life: If you are in the fight of your life, who do you want standing beside you? This should be based on 1 through 4 and not based on emotional choices because of compassion. Who can really make the most impact while keeping the organization progressing.
Sound too tough or too “cut-throat?” During leadership workshops and coaching sessions I have often facilitated discussions on this topic and consulted with organizations to help them think more strategically about their human capital. Nearly all employee terminations are difficult, but economic lay-offs I always find the most challenging.
Remember your responsibility to the organization for survival and profitability. Part of that responsibility is the organizations reputation, so don’t disregard the stigma of becoming a “cut-throat” entity. If you become identified as “cut-throat,” when the economic conditions improve you will have new challenges to face with rebuilding a workforce in your local community.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)